Couchbase vs. Riak

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Couchbase
Score 8.6 out of 10
N/A
Couchbase is a distributed NoSQL database platform that combines a JSON document store with a high-performance In-Memory architecture. The solution is designed to support high-throughput applications by integrating multiple data services—including Key-Value, Full-Text Search (FTS), Vector Search, and Real-Time Analytics—within a single unified platform.N/A
Riak
Score 10.0 out of 10
N/A
Riak is a NoSQL database from Basho Technologies in Bellevue, Washington.N/A
Pricing
CouchbaseRiak
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
CouchbaseRiak
Free Trial
YesNo
Free/Freemium Version
YesNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeOptionalNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
CouchbaseRiak
Considered Both Products
Couchbase
Chose Couchbase
It is optimized for interactive applications
Chose Couchbase
The project we are developing with Couchbase, was very inconsistent for few years of the beginning. We had to change data model multiple times. We knew this before starting the project. So we had to choose a NoSQL solution. We also wanted a syncing solution. After some research …
Chose Couchbase
I was not involved in the process of evaluating other products.
Chose Couchbase
Google Cloud Spanner meant "vendor lock-in". Yugabyte was pre-mature for us at the time. MySQL was not meant for the size of our data.
Chose Couchbase
Couchbase was mainly selected because it provided professional support, which was mandatory. I did not participate in the technical decisions.
Chose Couchbase
We have not used any other product like Couchbase
Chose Couchbase
Couchbase offers p2p sync and offline sync capabilities which gave an advantage over mongo. The sync has filter functions.
Chose Couchbase
Every data storage has it's own application domain. We use it in parallel
Chose Couchbase
Couchbase offers more flexibility, it is more secure and most importantly, it is scalable and therefore affordable.
Chose Couchbase
Couchbase is scalable and very secure. It also offers better features and is very capable.
Chose Couchbase
MS Cosmos DB
AWS Storage
Google Storage
Chose Couchbase
[Couchbase] lite has been in use for a long time for a couple of applications.
Chose Couchbase
Couchbase could outperform it's competition considerably for database reads and writes. Full text searches were still faster in Elasticsearch but this is more of a feature than a base platform requirement for us.
Chose Couchbase
At the time, Couchbase seemed the most mature of the NoSQL products and would allow us to achieve the goal of improving data access times for our products and services, giving the most benefit to our customers. MySQL was starting to be the bottleneck in our system performance …
Chose Couchbase
Performance-wise Couchbase is much better than MongoDB.
Chose Couchbase
Couchbase being a NoSQL database does not require a fixed schema and allows more flexibility in the development phase.
Chose Couchbase
Easy to deploy and manage. Clustering and replication is fairly simple and straightforward. According to developers, Couchbase scored higher points compared to the other products that we evaluated.
Chose Couchbase
The Apache Cassandra was one type of product used in our company for a couple of use-cases.
The Aerospike is something we [analyzed] not so long time ago as an interesting alternative, due to its performance characteristics.
The Oracle Coherence was and is still being used for …
Chose Couchbase
Single console for managing multi-cluster and multi-cloud deployment options and [the] ability to secure and isolate database information in a secure environment to prevent undefined access is great. Analyzing and delivering information and fast access and processing data …
Chose Couchbase
Experience with DataStax Cassandra was seamless, but the cost and effort to support it was not justified. Also commercial process experience with Couchbase was much better. ActiveSpaces is a good technology for big TIBCO shop, but keeping with the lifecycle of it is not easy. I …
Chose Couchbase
A strategic company, upcoming products, enhanced concepts. Couchbase is a single platform offering many different smaller products together viz Full-Text Search, Analytics, Eventing, Indexing, Querying, Integration with other products.
I also look forward to knowing more about …
Chose Couchbase
None of the products mentioned above provided a seamless synchronization strategy that could be available on-premises at the time.
Riak
Chose Riak
MongoDB seems to have copied a lot of functionality from Riak. This may be because MongoDB hired a number of former Basho engineers when Basho went bankrupt. That said, the new functions added to Riak after it became open source have successfully differentiated itself from …
Chose Riak
Every database has positives and negatives. Redis is very good at set operations, but not as good at executing fast queries. MongoDB is a much cheaper data store than Riak, but not as highly available and scalable. Searching Riak is also faster than searching MongoDB or …
Chose Riak
Because of the RESTful HTTP interface, the consistency model, and because of the catalog-driven data model, Riak was an easy win over Redis and Memcached.
Chose Riak
At the time I worked on the project those were the three competing technologies I evaluated. Couchbase didn't have memcache integrated at the time. Riak was by far the easiest to set up, and it's linking capability struck the right balance of having just enough relational …
Chose Riak
Riak is a key/value pair store which is great for certain use cases. For our use case, the ability to search is an extremely useful feature. Apache Cassandra can provide this while Riak cannot. Also again for our use case, the ability to delete is critical as we strive to …
Features
CouchbaseRiak
NoSQL Databases
Comparison of NoSQL Databases features of Product A and Product B
Couchbase
8.9
Ratings
4% above category average
Riak
-
Ratings
Performance8.90 Ratings00 Ratings
Availability9.40 Ratings00 Ratings
Concurrency8.90 Ratings00 Ratings
Security9.00 Ratings00 Ratings
Scalability9.40 Ratings00 Ratings
Data model flexibility9.00 Ratings00 Ratings
Deployment model flexibility8.00 Ratings00 Ratings
Best Alternatives
CouchbaseRiak
Small Businesses
IBM Cloudant
IBM Cloudant
Score 7.4 out of 10
Redis Software
Redis Software
Score 8.8 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
IBM Cloudant
IBM Cloudant
Score 7.4 out of 10
Redis Software
Redis Software
Score 8.8 out of 10
Enterprises
IBM Cloudant
IBM Cloudant
Score 7.4 out of 10
Redis Software
Redis Software
Score 8.8 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
CouchbaseRiak
Likelihood to Recommend
8.9
(0 ratings)
10.0
(0 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
2.1
(0 ratings)
9.0
(0 ratings)
Usability
8.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Availability
8.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Performance
9.3
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
8.5
(0 ratings)
9.0
(0 ratings)
Product Scalability
7.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
CouchbaseRiak
Likelihood to Recommend
Best suited when edge devices have interrupted internet connection. And Couchbase provides reliable data transfer. If used for attachment Couchbase has a very poor offering. A hard limit of 20 MB is not okay. They have the best conflict resolution but not so great query language on Couchbase lite.
Read full review
Riak is very good if you need a resilient data store that can handle large amounts of documents very fast. If you have 1,000,000 documents and need to execute complex queries, it is great. Riak's SOLR engine is fast, however if you have extremely high amount of queries in a very limited time range, it can fail in a bad way.
Read full review
Pros
  • Easy to store unstructured data and has great performance
  • Managing security is super easy which can be managed across different levels
  • UI is pretty simple to use and manage the cluster
  • Backup of the data is very easy and the restoration/recovery is fairly easy as well with the in-built tools.
  • Easy integration with elasticsearch for replication
  • It is fairly easy to scale up or scale down the cluster
Read full review
  • Reliability -- we rarely have to do anything to maintain our Riak instance. It is just online and available for whatever we throw at it.
  • The Riak Python client is an excellent tool and handles parallel writes/reads very well
  • There is a large and very receptive community or Riak users and developers who seem to be able to help with most technical questions that have arisen.
Read full review
Cons
  • Cluster sizing during the design phase can be improved, especially if the client lacks prior experience. Vendor consultants are very meticulous in order to provide best of class performance and response time, although some more real-world pragmatic approach is often needed.
  • Couchbase Lite 2 went thru a major revamp, which broke the compatibility of the applications with some features removed and other changed. That needed development teams working to refactor the applications.
Read full review
  • Missing a free text search function
  • More security work
  • Multi-tenant reporting
  • More types of index optimised for different structures
  • Automating repairs especially after unclean shutdowns
  • WebDAV/Samba shares for Riak CS
  • Implementing the SQL queries from Riak TS in Riak KV
  • Settable replication bandwidth caps
  • Safemode start up after failure
  • More client integrations
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
I rarely actually use Couchbase Server, I just stay up-to-date with the features that it provides. However, when the need arises for a NoSQL datastore, then I will strongly consider it as an option
Read full review
Riak works great for our use case but the fact that deletes seem to resurrect is a real issue for us. Unless we can get this solved, we'll continue to look at other products to see if our use case fits. Otherwise Riak is a great product and it fits our use case 95%. We have found work arounds to the remaining 5%.
Read full review
Usability
Couchbase has been quite a usable for our implementation. We had similar experience with our previous "trial" implementation, however it was short lived.
Couchbase has so far exceeded expectation. Our implementation team is more confident than ever before.
When we are Live for more than 6 months, I'm hoping to enhance this rating.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Performance
One of Couchbase’s greatest assets is its performance with large datasets. Properly set up with well-sized clusters, it is also highly reliable and scalable. User management could be better though, and security often feels like an afterthought. Couchbase has improved tremendously since we started using it, so I am sure that these issues will be ironed out.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Support Rating
I haven't had many opportunities to request support, I will look forward to better the rating. We have technical development and integration team who reach out directly to TAM at Couchbase.
Read full review
Despite Basho going bankrupt and the project becoming fully open-source, community support is reasonably good, albeit a little slow at times. Paid enterprise-grade support is also available from former Basho engineers but the same company also contributes to the community support for free for basic questions or specific knowledge areas.
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
Couchbase could outperform it's competition considerably for database reads and writes. Full text searches were still faster in Elasticsearch but this is more of a feature than a base platform requirement for us.
Read full review
MongoDB seems to have copied a lot of functionality from Riak. This may be because MongoDB hired a number of former Basho engineers when Basho went bankrupt. That said, the new functions added to Riak after it became open source have successfully differentiated itself from MongoDB.
Amazon S3 is a nice tool but when you are at significant scale with regionally specific data (joys of GDPR), it's much easier to keep it in house and Riak CS lets you do exactly that. All you need to do is point your application at Riak CS instead of Amazon S3 and it just works as if nothing has changed.
When we evaluated against Cassandra, we found the tools available did not match our needs at the time.
Read full review
Scalability
So far, the way that we mange and upgrade our clusters has be very smooth. It works like a dream when we use it in concert with AWS and their EC2 machines. Having access to powerful instances along side the Couchbase interface is amazing and allows us to do rebalances or maintenance without a worry
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Return on Investment
  • There have been several areas of our application [that] really needed an ACID compliant database (e.g. strong transactional guarantees) that we thought we could work around while using Couchbase. [In my opinion] that turned out to be a poor bet. You need to be certain that the specific characteristics of a NoSQL database fit your problem.
  • Couchbase does eliminate the need for schema upgrades completely. I.e no downtime or conversion windows as you migrate your data model, adding attributes, etc. This helped with the deployment timeframe associated with DB changes.
  • The database is (apparently) a bit more of a space/memory consumer than originally anticipated. During deployments, we received constant pressure from Couchbase consulting teams to eliminate/reduce the number of indexes, and this was because any mutations to docs in a bucket must check for impact against all indexes. More recent years have started to address this with their "collections" features, which helps isolate indexes to specific sub-groupings of documents.
Read full review
  • Riak's simple API and simple management model made it a no brainer when it came to adopting it as a technology for the team.
Read full review
ScreenShots